Museum visitor : The national government has mandated a 5 percent

Question

Museum visitor : The national government has mandated a 5 percent increase in the minimum wage paid to all workers. This mandate will adversely affect the museum-going public. The museum’s revenue does not currently exceed its expenses, and since the mandate will significantly increase the museum’s operating expenses, the museum will be forced either to raise admission fees or to decrease services.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the museum visitor’s argument?

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the museum visitor’s argument?

(A) Some of the museum’s employees are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage. 
(B) The museum’s revenue from admission fees had remained constant over the past five years. 
(C) Some of the museum’s employees are paid more than the current minimum wage.
(D) The annual number of visitors to the museum has increased steadily.
(E) Not all visitors to the museum are required to pay an admission fee.

MartyTargetTestPrep · Accepted Answer

(A)  Some  of the museum’s employees  are not  paid significantly more than the minimum wage.

(A Negated)  All  of the museum’s employees  are  paid  significantly more  than the minimum wage.

If, as the negated version of (A) says,  all  of the museum’s employees  are  paid significantly more than the minimum wage, then none are paid minimum wage, or anything even close.

In that case, a 5 percent increase in the minimum wage will make no difference to the museum, because the museum is already paying every employee significantly more than the minimum wage. So, the museum won't have to increase wages in response to the new mandate.

Thus, the author must be assuming that at least  some  of the museum’s employees  are not  paid significantly more than the minimum wage.

That said, this question is not ideal, because the passage seems to state as fact that the mandate will significantly increase the museum’s operating expenses. If it is a fact that the mandate will significantly increase the museum’s operating expenses, then the author does not have to be assuming anything about how much the employees are paid currently.

MofeBhatia · Answer

Premise -  Increase in minimum wage paid to workers will affect the operating expenses of the museum.

Conclusion-  Museum will be forced to increase either admission fee or reduce services.

Pre-thinking -  There go to be some employees who are paid minimum wage. It bridges the gap btw the conculsion and premise. 
If there are no employee with minimum wages, then operating expenses remain constant and conclusion breaks apart.

(A) Some of the museum’s employees are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage. 
 Correct , matches with Pre-thinking. 
(B) The museum’s revenue from admission fees had remained constant over the past five years. 
This is a strenghter NOT a assumption. 
(C) Some of the museum’s employees are paid more than the current minimum wage. 
Well, we're only concerned with employee with minimum wages
(D) The annual number of visitors to the museum has increased steadily.
Negate this asummption, annual number of visitors remains constant , operating expenses increase, which leads to increase in admission fee .
Conclussion still holds.
(E) Not all visitors to the museum are required to pay an admission fee. 
Out of scope.

udaypratapsingh99 · Answer

They're raising the minimum wage.
That will increase museum expenses.
The museum will thus have to raise income or cut spending.

The correct answer choice, A, provides:

There are some employees who don't make much more than minimum wage. (there are at least a few of these low income earners)

When we negate this assumption, or take it away, we get:

No there aren't; there are no employees who make that little (there are none of those low income earners)

If none of the museum employees make so little, that means that they all earn well above the minimum wage. In that case, the museum would be unaffected by the small increase to the minimum wage.

Tough one! Let me know whether that clears that one up--thanks!

redskull1 · Answer

An assumption HAS TO BE CORRECT.

I can understand if A) had the word MOST.But SOME kills A) right away.

Alternatively negate A.We get "Some are paid significantly more".This does not affect the argument in any way.

MofeBhatia · Answer

Hi ,

If you negate the option A, 'Some of the employees are paid minimum wage ' . This means now Museum needs to pay 5% more than minimum wage without any extra income. This breaks the conclusion of the author to provide for that extra 5% ,Museum will either have to increase admissiom fee or decrease services.

RaghavKhanna · Answer

GMATNinja

Unable to wrap my head around this one. Read multiple answers, but still confused between A and C.

Albymana · Answer

Hi guys, could you please explain me why the following reasoning is flawed?

Negate-C “none of the employees is paid more than the minimum wage”

Posted from my mobile device

neelugarg33 · Answer

The negation of A is not making sense why this should be the correct answer

TarunKumar1234 · Answer

Conclusion: It will significantly increase the museum’s operating expenses. The museum will be forced either to raise admission fees or to decrease services.

Pre-thinking: The museum increased minimum wages then how could expenses increase. We need to fill the gap with the reason.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the museum visitor’s argument?

(A) Some of the museum’s employees are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage. -> so, if minimum wages is increased then expenses would increase. Let's keep it.
(B) The museum’s revenue from admission fees had remained constant over the past five years. -> It will strengthen, but not the assumption.
(C) Some of the museum’s employees are paid more than the current minimum wage. -> then, expenses won't increase. It is weakening.
(D) The annual number of visitors to the museum has increased steadily. -> It will increase revenue, but no idea why expense will increase.
(E) Not all visitors to the museum are required to pay an admission fee. -> Irrelevant.

So, I think A.

shrgmat · Answer

This is a LSAT question - June 2008, Section II, Qn 9.
LSAT materials are excellent for CR and none of the vendors come close - Kaplan, Princeton, Veritas etc. 
I did the complete section just now - 26 questions. I got this one wrong (C). A is correct.
I think it is very much like a "weighted average" problem in quants.

A - If you are paying "SIGNIFICANTLY" more, 5% adds more to the total - impact on "operating expenses" is more severe than just $1 more (possible in C). That's why A is the answer over C.
B - I thought hard about this one too but as the prompt says that "revenue doesn't currently exceed expenses", this option has already been taken into account.

Thanks

Bunuel · Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

The problem with this argument is that if the minimum wage goes up, businesses are only affected if they  actually pay their employees something at or near the minimum wage . “Everyone at the museum makes five times the minimum wage” would be a devastating attack on the argument. So the museum visitor has necessarily assumed, at a minimum, that at least one museum employee is making at, or less than 5 percent more than, the minimum wage. (Otherwise the increase wouldn’t affect the museum at all.)

A) This is it. “Some” means one or more. If A isn’t true, then  all  of the museum’s employees are paid “significantly” more than the minimum wage. It’s not a stretch for us to assume that “significantly” means five percent or more, so if A isn’t true then the museum is not hit by the minimum wage increase. That means A is a Necessary Assumption of the argument.

B) Admission revenue could have gone up, down, or sideways over the past five years without affecting the visitor’s argument in the slightest.

C) This could only hurt the museum visitor’s argument. If we’re looking for something that is “required” for the museum visitor’s argument to stand, then we are looking for a missing piece of the argument—not something that would weaken that argument.

D) Like revenue in answer B, annual visitors could have gone up, down, or sideways over time without affecting the visitor’s argument in the slightest.

E) Like answer C, this could only  hurt  the museum visitor’s argument.

The best answer is A.

bmunukutla · Answer

Isn't the wording of this question problematic? I wanted to choose A but I interpreted it as meaning "some employees are paid over minimum wage, but it's not a significant amount"

unraveled · Answer

Museum visitor : The national government has mandated a 5 percent increase in the minimum wage paid to all workers. This mandate will adversely affect the museum-going public. The museum’s revenue does not currently exceed its expenses, and since the mandate will significantly increase the museum’s operating expenses, the museum will be forced either to raise admission fees or to decrease services.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the museum visitor’s argument?

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the museum visitor’s argument?

(A)  Some  of the museum’s employees  are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage . - CORRECT. If not then some(mostly all) are paid above minimum wage, in which case the increase is not there, thus not affecting general public.
(B) The museum’s revenue from  admission fees had remained constant over the past five years . - WRONG. Like D, this also does not affect the argument.
(C)  Some  of the museum’s employees  are paid more than the current minimum wage . - WRONG. Opposite to A. But one difference is whether they are paid significantly more or not. 
(D) The  annual number of visitors  to the museum has  increased steadily . - WRONG. Increased or not it does not affect the argument. 
(E) Not all visitors to the museum are  required to pay an admission fee . - WRONG. If so then MV's argument is in trouble, though minutely, but it is.

Only A and C stand a chance but C is not a necessary reuirement.

Answer A.

Prithvi08 · Answer

When negating an option what exact points do we look for? Cause I negated option A by stating 'Some of the museum’s employees  are  paid significantly more than the minimum wage. To me this didn't seem to be the correct answer so I eliminated A.

Iwillget770 · Answer

Hi  MartyTargetTestPrep ,

I understand A (after reading your explaination), but I was not able to reject OPTION C.

Option A and C both seem same.

Please guide

Thanks

mbaprepavi · Answer

Phew.. this one had my brain working..
Took me a bit to decipher why A, but a wonderful argument nonetheless

Argument Overview 
The argument presented by the museum visitor centers on the impact of a government-mandated increase in the minimum wage on the financial viability of the museum. The visitor contends that this increase will lead to higher operating expenses for the museum, which currently does not generate enough revenue to cover its expenses. Consequently, the museum may need to either raise admission fees or decrease services, which would adversely affect museum-goers.

Conclusion  
The conclusion of the argument is that the museum will be forced to either raise admission fees or decrease services due to the increase in operating expenses caused by the minimum wage mandate.

Premises 
 
 The national government has mandated a 5 percent increase in the minimum wage. 
 The museum's revenue currently does not exceed its expenses. 
 The increase in wages will significantly raise the museum's operating expenses.

Assumption

(A) Some of the museum’s employees are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage.

Why it’s an assumption:  The argument presupposes that the minimum wage increase will have a significant impact on the museum's operating costs. If all employees are already earning well above the minimum wage, then the increase in minimum wage may not lead to a significant rise in overall payroll expenses. Thus, for the conclusion about raising fees or reducing services to be valid, it must be assumed that some employees are indeed at or near the current minimum wage level.

The other options either do not directly support the argument or introduce information that does not necessarily affect the financial implications of the wage increase on the museum's operations.

Prakharvats · Answer

Acc to me C is a necessary requirement as negation of c will be most employees are not paid more than current wages ( more expense ) but in A negation most employees are paid minimum wages only some not ( less expense )

Museum visitor : The national government has mandated a 5 percent

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Museum visitor : The national government has mandated a 5 percent

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards